RWA has stones!

Romance Writers of America was informed of the new venture between Harlequin Enterprises and ASI Solutions to form Harlequin Horizons, a vanity/subsidy press. Many of you have asked the organization to state its position regarding this new development. As a matter of policy, we do not endorse any publisher’s business model. Our mission is the advancement of the professional interests of career-focused romance writers.

One of your member benefits is the annual National Conference. RWA allocates select conference resources to non-subsidy/non-vanity presses that meet the eligibility requirements to obtain those resources. Eligible publishers are provided free meeting space for book signings, are given the opportunity to hold editor appointments, and are allowed to offer spotlights on their programs.

With the launch of Harlequin Horizons, Harlequin Enterprises no longer meets the requirements to be eligible for RWA-provided conference resources. This does not mean that Harlequin Enterprises cannot attend the conference. Like all non-eligible publishers, they are welcome to attend. However, as a non-eligible publisher, they would fund their own conference fees and they would not be provided with conference resources by RWA to publicize or promote the company or its imprints.

Sometimes the wind of change comes swiftly and unexpectedly, leaving an unsettled feeling. RWA takes its role as advocate for its members seriously. The Board is working diligently to address the impact of recent developments on all of RWA’s members.

We invite you to attend the annual conference on July 28 – 31, 2010 in Nashville, TN, as we celebrate 30 years of success with keynote speaker Nora Roberts, special luncheon speaker Jayne Ann Krentz, librarian speaker Sherrilyn Kenyon, and awards ceremony emcee Sabrina Jeffries. Please refer to the RWA Web site for conference registration information in late January 2010.

I guess the question becomes, “Who is hurt more by this move by RWA? Harlequin or RWA members?”

So who needs who more? A good chunk of RWA’s membership publishes with Harlequin. Most of the RITAs are category length books published by them, and as a non-eligible publisher, I’m assuming their authors can no longer compete. I remember they sponsored some of the RWA conferences I’ve been to (lovely bags) as well, so without their dough, does that limit the financial scope of what RWA can do with the conference? They place lots of ads in RWA publications, too, again contributing financially to RWA’s coffers. I don’t see how RWA’s stance is going to slow the inexorable business model wheel Harlequin seems to be pushing with this new division, but I could be wrong.

So who’s the gorilla, and where is she going to sit? Anywhere she wants to, obviously. Someone just needs to figure out who it is.

I don’t have a dog in this hunt, but it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Exactly! Sometimes “what’s in it for me” is not the right question to ask. Is this going to be good for me? Probably not. Is it good for RWA? Most definitely. $$ not withstanding…HQ is not the only publisher in town. RWA will manage.

This also makes me wonder about other large publishers with ownership/ relationships with other self-publishers. Doesn’t Random House have a huge share of some big self/vanity pub? I think Harper Collins does too… So what’s the difference between those guys, and Harlequin?

I’m totally impressed with the board’s decision.
In the past, any number of smaller publishers have been knocked out by ever-changing vagaries.
This though, has always been at the heart of the RWA mission – no vanity publishers. Not even if a portion of your business is true publishing.
Brava to the board!

Let’s use Random House for example. Their parent company owned Xlibris.

They didn’t call it Ballantine Boundaries. They didn’t include referrals to their vanity imprint in every rejection. They didn’t put information and links all over their submission guidelines pages. There was NO connection between Random House and Xlibris. If the consumer found Xlibris on their own and pubbed a book, good for them. But Ballantine and Del Rey weren’t pimping for them. They weren’t using the respectable brand they had built to get more business.

Ann, I think it should apply to anyone if they advertise it or not, just a thought I had. Otherwise I’m not familiar with this all, but just thinking that it should be equal across the board…no is no, you know :roll: (sorry on my English, LOL)

RWA is taking the right stand. They are not a captive of Harlequin and vice versa. I’m not sure how Harlequin Horizon will pan out but Harlequin is going to have keep the distinction between their two companies or lose some of their current lines reputation.

I too thought it was tied to the publisher as well. I still think that RWA needs to clarify this. Sorry that you got caught up in all of this Laurie, good luck with your sales.

Having read the the ASI and Harlequin Horizons sites, they are meaning to redefine publishing in such a way the writer does not only all the work, but now they pay for it too and the HH/ASI reaps the rewards. IMHO Greed pure and simple.

Some of the remarks from their authors how the company set up their promotion made me laugh when romance authors have been doing their own for so long,talk about naive. The best with these people is BUYER BEWARE!

Like many here, this is a surprise but I too agree that RWA has made the right move. They after all are looking out for the welfare of the membership. That HQ would enter into such a venture makes me suspicious of their motives. Do I understand this correctly that they will get sort of a finders fee if one choses to publish thru this new venture?

I have to wonder if this is in repsonse to Amazon’s ‘CREATESPACE” venture that is very much a vanity press not only for writers but a number of the “arts”. Having been burned on a book purchased through Amazon with no idea that it was a selfpublished (and IMHO poorly edited) book.

I have to wonder if people could be mislead with a book from “Harlequin Horizons” thinking it has the same quality? If so that could hurt not only Harlequin regular authors but Romance in general.

I’m glad that RWA is looking our for the welfare of the membership but hope that they allow those current PAN members who only publish with Harlequin to be grandfathered in.

PAN membership has nothing to do with publishers, but on money earned and if the qualifying BOOK is non-vanity. Books published in the traditional (or even Ebook) business model with an advance/royalties of over $1000 will allow an AUTHOR to qualify. PAN isn’t tied to the publisher anymore. Even though Harlequin is now considered a vanity press, that doesn’t make a Blaze a vanity book because they paid me and not the other way around.

I just checked out the RWA website regarding PAN qualification. It states you have to be published by a non-vanity/non-subsidy publisher. Because I recently accepted an offer from HQN but haven’t yet received my contract, I haven’t been able to apply for PAN status yet. Now with this ruling, I won’t be PAN eligible at all. I can’t tell you how saddened and disappointed I am to learn this.

I’m sure those who are already PAN qualified are fine, but it’s brand new authors like me who are affected.

Having read this I believed it was very informative. I appreciate you finding the time
and effort to put this information together.
I once again find myself spending way too much time both reading and posting comments.
But so what, it was still worthwhile!

Greenhouses can also be built using landscape gardening and they can be incorporated inside of the garden collectively with a chilly-body.
The UK, like many parts of the world, serves as a centre point for business
and because of this, people are left with very little time to properly maintain their homes or property.

Many big thinkers over many years have come back again and
again to humanity’s desire to make sense of the hugeness of the universe by
making small imitations of it in which to live – the
garden, which directly refers to the ultimately terrifying wildness that used to sit outside every cave in the world, is probably the ultimate example of this urge.

But the legal departments of cellphone manufacturers have
slipped warnings about holding the phone against your head
or body into the fine print of the little slip that you toss aside when unpacking your phone.
They have the funds for you (or your child) a cellphone number that should not shift when they move.
Carlo’s work is now outdated, many of the proponents of the dangers of cell phones look to him as their main inspiration, and base their arguments on his propositions.

A simple sprint routine will only take about 15 minutes to complete,
and you will burn a ridiculous amount of calories.
If you move around the court and shoot without hesitating, you
can get comfortable shooting quickly. Now, if you think that you are dedicated enough to lose your stubborn
belly and transform it into a six pack abs, the Truth about Six Pack Abs
e – Book is a big help and I feel so positive with
this program.